9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 491X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner(A.R.) for the Respondent Per: Ramesh Nair The fact of the case is that on the dispute of manufacture and valuation of job work goods, proceedings was going on against the appellant. When the matter reached to the Supreme Court, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while admitting the appeal by interim order directed the appellant to deposit 50% of the duty amount and for remaining 50% to execute th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd upheld Order-in-Original therefore appellant are before us. 2. None appeared on behalf of the appellant, however on perusal of record, we find that main contention of the appellant is that appellant claimed refund in respect of amount for which bank guarantee was executed as security and same was encashed, therefore in case of encashed amount, refund thereof is not governed by Section 11B and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inguished the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in case of Oswal Agro Mills (Supra) accordingly amount refundable is hit by unjust enrichment therefore it was rightly credited into consumer welfare fund. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the record. 5. We find that the appellant at any stage did not submit any evidence to show that the amount for whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en the characteristic of excise duty therefore encashed amount of bank guarantee which is nothing else than the excise duty is clearly governed by the provisions of unjust enrichment provided under Section 11B therefore in the present case unjust enrichment is clearly applicable and the adjudicating authority as well as Commissioner(Appeals) have correctly and legally held that sanctioned amount i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
